Work plan prioritization for application development and maintenance using pooled resources in a factory

ABSTRACT

A computer implemented method, system and/or computer program product schedules execution of work requests through work plan prioritization. One or more work packets are mapped to and assigned to each work request from a group of work requests. A complexity level is derived for and assigned to each work packet, and priority levels of various work requests are determined for each entity from a group of entities. A global priority for the group of work requests is then determined. The global priority and the complexity levels combine to create a priority function, which is used to schedule execution of the work requests.

The present application is a continuation of U.S. patent applicationSer. No. 12/862,904, filed on Aug. 25, 2010, and entitled “Work PlanPrioritization for Application Development and Maintenance Using PooledResources in a Factory,” which is incorporated herein by reference.

BACKGROUND

The present disclosure relates to the field of computers, andspecifically to the use of computers in prioritizing work plans. Stillmore particularly, the present disclosure relates to the use ofcomputers in prioritizing work requests in a factory that uses pooledresources.

SUMMARY

A computer implemented method, system and/or computer program productschedules execution of work requests through work plan prioritization.One or more work packets are mapped to and assigned to each work requestfrom a group of work requests. A complexity level is derived for andassigned to each work packet, and priority levels of various workrequests are determined for each entity from a group of entities. Aglobal priority for the group of work requests is then determined. Theglobal priority and the complexity levels combine to create a priorityfunction, which is used to schedule execution of the work requests.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is an overview of a software factory that may be used in oneembodiment of the present disclosure;

FIG. 2 is a flow-chart of steps taken to create custom software throughthe use of work packets in a software factory;

FIG. 3 presents an overview of the life cycle of work packets;

FIG. 4 presents an overview of an environment in which work packets aredefined and assembled;

FIG. 5 is a high-level flow-chart of steps taken to define and assemblework packets;

FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary computer in which the present inventionmay be utilized; and

FIG. 7 is a high level flow chart of one or more steps executed by aprocessor to schedule execution of work requests through work planprioritization.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, some or all of thepresent disclosure may be embodied as a system, method or computerprogram product. Accordingly, the present disclosure may take the formof an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment(including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) or anembodiment combining software and hardware aspects that may allgenerally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module” or “system.”Furthermore, some or all of the features described in the presentdisclosure may take the form of a computer program product embodied inone or more computer-readable medium(s) having computer-readable programcode embodied thereon.

Any combination of one or more computer-readable medium(s) may beutilized. The computer-readable medium may be a computer-readable signalmedium or a computer-readable storage medium. A computer-readablestorage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an electronic,magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system,apparatus, or device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. Morespecific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of the computer-readablestorage medium would include the following: an electrical connectionhaving one or more wires, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, arandom access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasableprogrammable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), an optical fiber,a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storagedevice, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of theforegoing. In the context of this document, a computer-readable storagemedium may be any tangible medium that can contain or store a programfor use by or in connection with an instruction execution system,apparatus, or device.

A computer-readable signal medium may include a propagated data signalwith computer-readable program code embodied therein, for example, inbaseband or as part of a carrier wave. Such a propagated signal may takeany of a variety of forms, including, but not limited to,electro-magnetic, optical, or any suitable combination thereof. Acomputer-readable signal medium may be any computer-readable medium thatis not a computer-readable storage medium and that can communicate,propagate, or transport a program for use by or in connection with aninstruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

Program code embodied on a computer-readable medium may be transmittedusing any appropriate medium, including but not limited to wireless,wireline, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination ofthe foregoing.

As described herein, one embodiment of the present disclosure relates toresource management and service planning, and more particularly to amethod for generating optimum prioritization of work plans contingentupon multiple initial priority perspectives and finite availability ofvarious resource and/or skills. Thus, the present disclosure relates tominimizing the tardiness of work request execution by consideringpriorities of multiple parties (e.g., a customer for a product, amanufacturer of the product, a broker of the product, etc.) as well asthe complexity of the work requests.

One way to minimize the lateness of a work plan (e.g., work request)being executed is to formulate a priority function y* as:

$\begin{matrix}{y^{*} = {\underset{{c_{i}{(y)}} \geq 0}{argmin}{\sum\limits_{l}{w_{l}{U\left( {{C\left( y_{l} \right)} - D_{l}} \right)}}}}} & {{Formula}\mspace{14mu}(1)}\end{matrix}$where y_(l) is the decision vector for execution of each l^(th) workitem, C is the completion time, D_(l) is the deadline of the l^(th) workitem, and w_(l) is the weight or importance of l^(th) work item. Thefunction U( )is the step function, and c_(i)(y) is the i^(th)optimization constraint that depends, among other things, on the detailsof the scheduling. In order to formulate Formula (1) in such a way thatit is a “fair” representative of true objectives and constraints in reallife factories, including software factories, the present disclosuremodifies Formula (1) to create Formula (2), which is presented anddiscussed in detail below.

For any development project, there are many requirements (i.e., workrequests), which are prioritized differently by customers, producers,and delivery organizations. Thus, a work request that has a top priorityfor a customer may have only secondary priority to a deliveryorganization. This variance in priorities can be due to differentservice level agreements (SLA) with individual clients/customers, thecloseness of a deadline, the criticality of a deadline, etc. There canalso be a limited set of resources to work on the project/product, whichwould affect the priority/urgency of a project from the perspective of aproducer. In the context of a software factory (described below), eachteam can be working on multiple projects at the same time. Thus, thepresent disclosure presents a process for balancing the priorityrequirements across multiple projects and multiple entities.

Given a finite set of resources and competing customer schedules, themethod described herein re-evaluates priority/urgency/requirements'priorities in order to reassign resources according to theoverall/reconciled highest priority task. This prioritization happensbefore any scheduling/capacity management function and helps determinewhich deadlines and priorities should be used to determine resourceassignment. This leads to the creation of an objective function thatdetermines a main requirement's priority that reflects all stakeholderconcerns. An optimization algorithm (see Formula (2) below) is used todetermine the optimal priority that maximizes the objective function.

Table 1, shown below, shows a table of requirements, each of whichrelates to one or more work packets that need to be completed.

TABLE 1 Work Packets Needed Priority Req # WP_Type (Complexity) CustomerFactory Delivery Org R01 WP1 (H), WP2 (L) H M M R02 WP1 (H), WP3 (H) M ML R03 WP2 (L) M H M

The first column in Table 1 identifies various work requests (RO1, RO2,RO3). The second column in Table 1 shows the type of work packets neededfor a particular work request, and the level of complexity for each workpacket. For example, work request RO1 is made up of two work packets:WP1 and WP2. Each work packet has been assigned a complexity level,based on an initial estimate for a duration of time, a number ofresources, and resource skill requirements that will be required tocomplete a particular work packet. Thus, the two work packets thatcomprise RO1, WP1 and WP2, have respective complexity ratings of high(H) and low (L).

The remaining columns in Table 1 show priorities assigned to the workrequest by different stakeholders, such a customer (i.e., an entity whohas ordered a product), a factory (i.e., an entity that will beproducing the product), and a delivery organization (i.e., an entitythat will broker and/or deliver the finished product to the customer).Thus, a work request that is of high priority to a customer (e.g., RO1)may only be of medium priority to the factory and delivery organizationif there is no service level agreement (SLA) penalty associated withthat work request for the factory and/or delivery organization.Furthermore, a medium priority work request (ticket) for the deliveryorganization (e.g., RO3) could be a high priority ticket for the factorysince the required skills will be unavailable shortly.

One embodiment of the present disclosure incorporates a priorityfunction into Formula (1), resulting in Formula (2):

$\begin{matrix}{y^{*} = {\underset{{c_{i}{(y)}} \geq 0}{argmin}{\sum\limits_{l}{{W\left( {y_{l},p_{l},s_{l}} \right)}{U\left( {{C\left( y_{l} \right)} - D_{l}} \right)}}}}} & {{Formula}\mspace{14mu}(2)}\end{matrix}$In Formula (2), W( ) represents the priority function, p_(l) is a set ofweight factor perspectives or priority perspectives (e.g., from acustomer, factory, etc.) for l^(th) work items, and s_(i) is a set ofskills required for execution of l^(h) work items. Using various choicesof priority functions, a balance of a true priority of each work item(work request, packet), W( ) represents the priority function, p_(l) isa set of weight factor perspectives or priority perspectives (e.g. fromclient, factory, etc.) for l^(th) work item, and s_(l) is a set ofskills required for execution of l^(th) work item. That is, usingvarious choices for factors in Formula (2), a priority function balancesthe true priority of a work request based on the inputs/factors shown inthe formula.

In one embodiment of the present disclosure, a software factory isutilized as a producer of a product that is created by executing one ormore work requests, where each work request is made up of one or morework packets. A software factory establishes a disciplined approach toleveraging global resources for application development and maintenanceactivities. As described herein, resources with similar skills arepooled by functional area(s) and geographically organized into assemblycenters. Resources in an assembly center may have skills that enablethem to work in other functional areas/move to other assembly centers. Aresource allocated to multiple functional areas has a primary functionalarea. In the present disclosure, attention is paid to managing theallocation of resources to primary functional areas by taking intoaccount both short term and long term consequences.

Described below is a software factory, which includes a collection ofbusiness and Information Technology (IT) governance models, operationalmodels, delivery methods, metrics, environment and tools bundledtogether to improve the quality of delivered software systems, controlcost overruns, and effect timely delivery of such systems. The softwarefactory described herein offers a practical solution to developingsoftware systems using multiple sites that are geographicallydistributed. The issues of varying time zones and the hand-over betweenvarious teams residing in such time zones are handled by exchanging workpackets. A work packet is a self-contained work unit that is composed ofprocesses, roles, activities, applications and the necessary inputparameters that allow a team to conduct a development activity in aformalized manner with visibility to progress of their effort affordedto the requesting teams.

The software factory described herein is a uniquely engineered scalableefficiency model construct that transforms a traditional softwaredevelopment art form into a repeatable scientific managed engineeredstreamline information supply chain. The software factory incorporatesapplied system and industrial engineering quality assured efficienciesthat provide for the waste eliminating, highly optimized performedinstrumentation, measured monitoring and risk mitigated management ofsoftware development.

Software Factory Overview

With reference now to the figures, and in particular to FIG. 1, anoverview of a preferred embodiment of a software factory 100 ispresented. As depicted, the software factory 100 is a service thatinteracts with both enterprise customers (i.e., client customers) 102 aswell as enterprise partners (i.e., third party vendors) 104. The primaryhuman interface with the enterprise customers 102 is through a ClientBusiness Governance Board (CBGB) 106. CBGB 106 represents clientstakeholders and client business sponsors that fund a project of thesoftware factory 100. CBGB 106 can be an internal or external client.That is, the same enterprise (i.e., internal client) may include bothCBGB 106 and software factory 100, or a first enterprise (i.e., externalclient) may have CBGB 106 while a second enterprise has the softwarefactory 100. As described in greater detail below, a project proposaldefinition is then run through a software factory induction process in aSoftware Factory Governance Board (SFGB) 108 and Software FactoryOperations (SFO) 110, where the project proposal definition isevaluated, qualified, scored and categorized. The project proposaldefinition is then subject to a System Engineering ConceptualRequirements Review by the SFGB 108. Based on the outcome of the reviewby the SFGB 108, a decision is made to accept the project proposaldefinition or to send it back to the CBGB 106 for remediation andresubmission through the Software Factory Induction Process.

Thus, Software Factory Governance, which includes SFGB 108 and SFO 110,provides the guidance, constraints, and underlying enforcement of allthe factory policies and procedures, in support of their governingprinciples in support of the strategic objects of the Software Factory100. Software Factory governance consists of factory business, IT andoperations governance. The principles, policies and procedures of thesemodels are carried out by two governing bodies—the Business GovernanceBoard and the IT Governance Board (both part of SFGB 108), and anenforcement body—the Software Factory Operations 110.

Thus, Software Factory Governance is responsible for:

Business and IT strategic planning;

Assuring that Business and IT strategies are aligned;

Setting Goals;

Monitoring those goals;

Detecting problems in achieving those goals;

Analyzing Problems;

Identifying Reasons;

Taking Action;

Providing Feedback; and

Re-Strategizing (Continue process improvement).

As soon as a project is deemed worthy to proceed, the job of creatingthe custom software is sent to a Design Center 112, where the project isbroken into major functional areas, including those handled by aRequirements Analysis Team 114 and an Architectural Team 116.

The Requirements Analysis Team 114 handles the Requirement Managementside of the Design Center 112, and is responsible for collecting thebusiness requirements from the lines of business and populating theserequirements into the tools. Analysis of business requirements is alsocarried out in order to derive associated IT requirements. Somerequirements (e.g. system requirements) may have a contractualconstraint to use a certain infrastructure. Requirements are analyzedand used in the basis for business modeling. These requirements andrepresentative business (contextual, event and process models) are thenverified with and signed off from project stakeholders. Requirements arethen base-lined and managed within release and version control.

The Architectural Side of the Design Center 112 is handled by theArchitecture Team 116, which takes the output of therequirement/analysis/management side of the design center, and usesarchitectural decision factors (functional requirements, non-functionalrequirements, available technology, and constraints), to model a designwith appropriate example representation into detail designspecification, that is bundled with other pertinent factors into a workpacket for assembly lines to execute.

Work Packets 118 are reusable, self-contained, discrete units ofsoftware code that constitute a contractual agreement that governs therelationship among Design Center 112, Software Factory Governance Board108, Software Factory Operations 110, and Assembly Line 120. That is,each work packet 118 includes governance policies and procedures (e.g.,including instructions for how work reports are generated andcommunicated to the client), standards (e.g., protocol for the workpacket 118), reused assets (e.g., reusable blocks of code, including therequirements, instructions and/or links/pointers associated with thosereusable blocks of code), work packet instructions (e.g., instructionsfor executing the work packet 118), integration strategy (e.g., how tointegrate the work packet 118 into a client's security system), schedule(e.g., when deliverables are delivered to the client), exit criteria(e.g., a checklist for returning the work packet 118 and/or deliverablesto the software factory 100), and Input/Output (I/O) work products(e.g., artifact checklist templates for I/O routines).

Assembly Line(s) 120 which are part of a Job Shop, include, but are notlimited to any team that is initialized, skilled and certified to acceptapplication factory work packets from the factory Design Center 112. JobShops receive and execute the work packets 118, which are specified bythe Design Center 112, to create a customized deliverable 122. As shownin exemplary manner, the assembly line 120 puts the work packets 118into a selected low-level design to generate a deliverable (executableproduct). While assembly line 120 can be a manual operation in which acoding person assembles and tests work packets, in another embodimentthis process is automated using software that recognizes project types,and automatically assembles work packets needed for a recognized projecttype.

Various tests can be performed in the assembly line 120, includingcode/unit tests, integration test, system test, system integration test,and performance test. “Code/unit test” tests the deliverable forstand-alone bugs. “Integration test” tests the deliverable forcompatibility with the client's system. “System test” checks theclient's system to ensure that it is operating properly. “Systemintegration test” tests for bugs that may arise when the deliverable isintegrated into the client's system. “Performance test” tests thedeliverable as it is executing in the client's system. Note that if thedeliverable is being executed on a service provider's system, then alltests described are obviously performed on the service provider's systemrather than the client's system.

A User Acceptance Test Team 124 includes a client stakeholder that ischarged with the responsibility of approving acceptance of deliverable122.

Software factory 100 may utilize enterprise partners 104 to providehuman, hardware or software support in the generation, delivery and/orsupport of deliverables 122. Such third party contractors are viewed asa resource extension of the software factory 100, and are governed underthe same guidelines described above.

If an enterprise partner 104 is involved in the generation of workpackets 118 and/or deliverables 122, an interface between the softwarefactory 100 and the enterprise partner 104 may be provided by a serviceprovider's interface team 126 and/or a product vendor's interface team128. Service provided by an enterprise partner 104 may be a constraintthat is part of contractual agreement with a client to providespecialized services. An example of such a constraint is a requiredintegrated information service component that is referenced in theintegration design portion of the work packet 118 that is sent toassembly line 120. Again, note that third party service providers use astandard integration strategy that is defined by the software factory100, and, as such, are subject to and obligated to operate undersoftware factory governance.

Product vendor's interface team 128 provides an interface with a ProductVendor, which is an enterprise partner 104 that provides softwarefactory 100 with supported products that maybe used within a softwarefactory solution. Product Vendors are also responsible for providingproduct support and maintaining vendor's relationships, which aremanaged under the software factory's governance guidelines.

Support Team 130 includes both Level 2 (L2) support and Level 1 (L1)support.

L2 Support is provided primarily by Software Engineers, who provideproblem support of Software Factory produced delivered code forcustomers. That is, if a deliverable 122 doesn't run as designed, thenthe software engineers will troubleshoot the problem until it is fixed.These software engineers deliver technical assistance to SoftwareFactory customers with information, tools, and fixes to prevent knownsoftware (and possibly hardware) problems, and provide timely responsesto customer inquiries and resolutions to customer problems.

L1 support is primarily provided by an L1 Help Desk (Call Center). L1Help Desk support can be done via self-service voice recognition andvoice response, or by text chat to an automated smart attendant, or acall can be directed to a Customer Service Representative (CSR).Customer Service Representatives in this role provide first line of helpproblem support of Software Factory produced deliverables. Such helpincludes user instruction of known factory solution procedures. For anyrelated customers issues that cannot be resolved through L1, the L1 HelpDesk will provide preliminary problem identification and create troubleticket entry into trouble tracking system, which then triggers aworkflow event to dynamically route the problem issue to an availableand appropriate L2 support group queue.

With reference now to FIG. 2, a flow-chart of exemplary steps taken tocreate custom software through the use of a software factory ispresented. After initiator block 202, which may be a creation of acontract between an enterprise client and a software factory service,input, from a Client Business Governance Board, is received at asoftware factory (block 204). This input is a detailed description ofthe custom software needs of the enterprise client. While such input isusually prepared and presented by human management of the enterpriseclient, alternatively this input may be the creation of a UnifiedModeling Language (UML) based description of the needed software. Basedon the client's input, a project software proposal definition is createdby the Software Factory Governance Board of the software factory (block206). This project software proposal definition is sent to thescheduling/dispatching department of the Software Factory Operations,which creates a software project.

The software project is then inducted (block 208). As will be describedin more detail below, the project induction provides an initialintroduction of the project to the software factory. Through the use ofvarious parameters, including those found in records of other projects,checklists, et al., the project is initially evaluated. This evaluationincludes determining if the software factory has the capacity,resources, bandwidth, etc. needed for the project. If so, then adetermination is made as to whether the project is qualified foracceptance by the software factory. Such qualification includes, but isnot limited to, determining if the project falls within the guidelinesset by a Service Level Agreement (SLA) between the client enterprise andthe software factory, whether the project conforms to legal guidelinessuch as Sarbanes-Oxley, etc. Based on these and other criteria, theproject is scored for feasibility, profitability, and desirability forimplementation. If the induction process concludes that the projectshould proceed, then it is categorized into a particular type of project(e.g., payroll, inventory control, database management, marketing, etal.).

If the induction process does not pass (query block 210), indicatingthat the project should not proceed, then the project is returned to theClient Business Governance Board for additional discussions between theClient Business Governance Board and the software factory, in order toinduct a revised project (i.e., reinduct the software project). However,if the induction process passes, then the software project is parsedinto major functional areas (block 212). That is, the project is dividedup (“broken apart”) in order to establish subunits that can later beintegrated into a single custom software (“deliverable”).

Work packets are then obtained for all of the functional areas of thesoftware project (block 214). These work packets are reusable componentswhich are described in detail below. The work packets are then stitchedtogether (block 216) on an assembly line to create deliverable customsoftware that meets the criteria for the software project that has beenestablished in the earlier steps. The custom software is then tested inthe software factory (block 218). Once testing is completed, the customsoftware is delivered (block 220) to the client customer, who receiveson-going support from the support team (block 222). The flow-chart endsat terminator block 224.

While the process has been described for the creation of customsoftware, the same process is used by a software factory for otheractivities, including creating a service for a customer, creatingstandardized software, etc. Thus, the software factory uses work packetsto blend software (including reusable artifacts), protocols (e.g., howsoftware will be transmitted, how individuals will be contacted, etc.),governance requirements (e.g., service level agreements that describehow much a service will cost) and operating environments (hardware andsoftware, including operating systems, integrated environments such asSAP™, Rational™, etc.) into a single integrated product, which can thenbe used in a stand-alone manner or can be fed into anothersystem/product.

Note that software factory 100 may be virtual. That is, the differentcomponents (e.g., software factory governance board 108, softwarefactory operations 110, design center 112, assembly line 120) may belocated in different locations, and may operate independently under thecontrol of information found in work packets 118. In a preferredembodiment, each of the different components of the software factory 100publishes a set of services that the component can provide and a set ofrequirements for using these services. These services are functions thatare well defined and made visible for outside entities to call.

For example, assume that assembly line 120 publishes a service that itcan assemble only work packets that include code and protocol thatutilize IBM's Rational™ software development platform. Thus, theassembly line 120 has published its service (set of services includes“assembling work packets”) and the required protocol (set ofrequirements includes “utilize IBM's Rational™ software developmentplatform”) to the design center 112, which must decide if it wants (oris able) to utilize that particular assembly line 120. If not, thenanother assembly line from another software factory may be called uponby the design center 112. Behind each offered service are the actualprocesses that a component performs. These processes are steps taken bythe service. Each step is performed by a section of software, or may beperformed by an individual who has been assigned the task of performingthis step. Each step utilizes leveraged tools, including the workpackets 118 described herein. These work packets 118 then implement theprocess.

By utilizing published interfaces between the different components ofthe software factory 100, then different components from differentsoftware factories can be interchanged according to the capabilityoffered by and protocol used by each component. This enables a “buildingblock” architecture to be implemented through the use of differentcomponents from different software factories.

Life Cycle of a Work Packet

There are five phases in the life cycle of a work packet, which areshown in FIG. 3. These five phases are 1) Defining (block 302); 2)Assembling (block 304); Archiving (block 306); Distributing (block 308);and Pulling for Execution (block 310). As indicated by the top dashedline coming out of asset repository 312, this life cycle may berecursive. That is, in one embodiment, work packets are modified andupgraded in a recursive manner, which includes the steps shown in FIG.3. Once a work packet is assembled and archived, it is stored in anasset repository 312, whence the work packet may be accessed andutilized by an asset manager 314 for assembly into a deliverable by anassembly line 316. Note that the assembly line 316 can also send, to theasset manager 314, a message 318 that requests a particular work packet320, which can be pulled (block 310) into the asset repository 312 bythe asset manager 314. This pulling step (block 310), is performedthrough intelligent routing distribution (block 308) to the assetrepository 312 and assembly line 316. The configuration of the routingdistribution of the work packet 320 is managed by the asset manager 314,which is software that indexes, stores and retrieves assets created andused with the software factory.

Work Packet Components

A work packet is a self-contained work unit that comprises processes,roles, activities (parts of the job), applications, and necessary inputparameters that allow a team to conduct a development activity in aformalized manner, with visibility to progress of their effort affordedto requesting teams. A work packet is NOT a deliverable softwareproduct, but rather is a component of a deliverable software product.That is, a work packet is processed (integrated into a system, tested,etc.) to create one or more deliverables. Deliverables, which werecreated from one or more work packets, are then combined into a customsoftware, such as an application, service or system.

In a preferred embodiment, a work packet is composed of the followingeight components:

Governance Policies and Procedures—these policies and procedures includeprotocol definitions derived from a project plan. That is, a projectplan for a particular custom software describes how work packets arecalled, as well as how work packets report back to the calling plan.

Standards—this component describes details about how work packets areimplemented into a deliverable in a standardized manner Examples of suchstandards are naming conventions, formatting protocol, etc.

Reused Assets—this component includes actual code, or at least pointersto code, that is archived for reuse by different assembled deliverables.

Work Packet Instructions—this component describes detailed instructionsregarding how a work packet is actually executed. That is, work packetinstructions document what work packets need to be built, and how tobuild them. These instructions include a description of the requirementsthat need to be met, including design protocols, code formats, and testparameters.

Integration Strategy—this component describes how a set of work packets,as well as deliverables developed from a set of work packets, are ableto be integrated into a client's system. This component includesinstructions regarding what processes must be taken by the client'ssystem to be prepared to run the deliverable, as well as securityprotocols that must be followed by the deliverable. The component mayalso include a description of how one deliverable will interact withother applications that are resident to the client's computer system.

Scheduling—this component describes when a set of work packets are to besent to an assembly line, plus instructions on monitoring the progressand status of the creation of the work packet.

Exit Criteria—this component includes instructions (e.g., through theuse of a checklist) for deploying a deliverable to the client's system.That is, this component is the quality criteria that the deliverablemust meet before it can be considered completed and acceptable for aproject.

Input Work Products—this component includes Input/Output (I/O) templatesthat are used to describe specific work products that are needed toexecute the activities of the work packet (in the assembly line) tobuild the deliverable.

Defining a Work Packet

The process of defining a work packet is called a “work packetdefinition process.” This process combines critical references fromgovernance, factory operations (e.g., factory management, projectmanagement), business criteria, and design (including test) artifacts.Structured templates enable governance, design center, and factoryoperations to define the referenced artifacts by filling incorresponding functional domain templates, thus defining the contents ofthe work packet. Thus, a work packet includes not only reusable softwarecode, but also includes governance and operation instructions. Forexample, a work packet may include directions that describe a sequenceof steps to be taken in a project; which data is to be used in theproject; which individuals/departments/job descriptions are to performeach step in the project; how assigned individuals/departments are to benotified of their duties and what steps/data are to be taken and used,et al. Thus, each work packet includes traceability regarding the statusof a job, as well as code/data/individuals to be used in the executionof a project.

Thus, work packets are created from unique references to governance,factory operations (factory mgt, project mgt), business, and design(including test) artifacts. The packet definition process providesstructure templates that enable governance, design center, and factoryoperations to define referenced artifacts (newly defined artifactidentifiers or any reusable part of existing work packet definitions),by filling in corresponding functional domain (e.g., eXtensible MarkupLanguage—XML) templates. What can be defined may be controlled by aDocument Type Definition (DTD). The DTD states what tags and attributesare used to describe content in the deliverable, including where eachXML tag is allowed and which XML tags can appear within the deliverable.XML tag values are defined and applied to a newly defined XML templatefor each functional area of a design center. These XML templates arethen merged into one hierarchical structure when later assembled intofinalized work packets.

With reference now to FIG. 4, an overview of the environment in which apacket definition process 402 occurs is presented. The packet definitionprocess 402 calls artifacts 404, metrics 406, and a template 408 todefine a work packet. The artifacts may be one or more of: governanceartifacts 410 (intellectual property assets produced in the softwarefactory by the Software Factory Governance Board 108 described in FIG.1); business contextual artifacts 412 (intellectual property assetsproduced in the software factory by business analysts in the requirementanalysis team 114 described in FIG. 1); architectural artifacts 414(intellectual property assets produced by the architecture team 116described in FIG. 1); test artifacts 416 (intellectual property assetsproduced by test architects in the architecture team 116 shown in FIG.1); and project artifacts 418 (intellectual property assets produced inthe software factory by system engineers in the design center 112 shownin FIG. 1).

The metrics 406 may be one or more of: governance metrics 420(measurable governance indicators, such as business plans); factorymetrics 422 (measurable indicators that describe the capabilities of thesoftware factory, including assembly line capacity); and system metrics424 (measurable indicators that describe the capabilities of theclient's computer system on which deliverables are to be run).

Based on a template 408 for a particular deliverable, artifacts 404 andmetrics 406 are used by a packet assembly process 426 to assemble one ormore work packets.

Assembling a Work Packet

Template 408, shown in FIG. 4, describes how a work packet is to beassembled. The template 408 includes metadata references to keyartifacts 404 and metrics 406, which are merged into a formal workpacket definition as described above. The work packet is then assembledin a standardized hierarchical way and packaged within a factory messageenvelope that contains a header and body.

With reference now to FIG. 5, a high-level flow-chart of steps taken todefine and assemble work packets is presented. After initiator block 502(which may be an order by the Requirements Analysis Team 114 to theArchitecture Team 116, shown in FIG. 1, to create a designcenter-defined work packet), the requisite packet definitions arecreated for work packets that are to be used in deliverables (block504). First, a template, which preferably is a reusable that has beenused in the past to create the type of work packet needed, is called(block 506). Based on that called template, the needed artifacts (block508) and metrics (block 510) are called. Using the template as a guide,the called artifacts and metrics are assembled in the requisite workpackets (block 512), and the process ends.

With reference now to the figures, and in particular to FIG. 6, there isdepicted a block diagram of an exemplary computer 602, which may beutilized by the present disclosure. Computer 602 includes a processorunit 604 that is coupled to a system bus 606. Processor unit 604 mayutilize one or more processors, each of which has one or more processorcores. A video adapter 608, which drives/supports a display 610, is alsocoupled to system bus 606. System bus 606 is coupled via a bus bridge612 to an input/output (I/O) bus 614. An I/O interface 616 is coupled toI/O bus 614. I/O interface 616 affords communication with various I/Odevices, including a keyboard 618, a mouse 620, a media tray 622 (whichmay include storage devices such as CD-ROM drives, multi-mediainterfaces, etc.), a floppy disk drive 624, and an input/output (I/O)port 626. While the format of the ports (including I/O port 626)connected to I/O interface 616 may be any known to those skilled in theart of computer architecture, in a preferred embodiment some or all ofthese ports are universal serial bus (USB) ports. Note that some or allof the architecture depicted for computer 602 may be utilized bysoftware deploying computer 650 and/or software factory managingcomputer 652.

As depicted, in one embodiment, computer 602 is optionally able tocommunicate via network 628 using a network interface 630. Network 628may be an external network such as the Internet, or an internal networksuch as an Ethernet or a virtual private network (VPN).

A hard drive interface 632 is also coupled to system bus 606. Hard driveinterface 632 interfaces with a hard drive 634. In a preferredembodiment, hard drive 634 populates a system memory 636, which is alsocoupled to system bus 606. System memory is defined as a lowest level ofvolatile memory in computer 602. This volatile memory includesadditional higher levels of volatile memory (not shown), including, butnot limited to, cache memory, registers and buffers. Data that populatessystem memory 636 includes computer 602′s operating system (OS) 638 andapplication programs 644.

OS 638 includes a shell 640, for providing transparent user access toresources such as application programs 644. Generally, shell 640 is aprogram that provides an interpreter and an interface between the userand the operating system. More specifically, shell 640 executes commandsthat are entered into a command line user interface or from a file.Thus, shell 640, also called a command processor, is generally thehighest level of the operating system software hierarchy and serves as acommand interpreter. The shell provides a system prompt, interpretscommands entered by keyboard, mouse, or other user input media, andsends the interpreted command(s) to the appropriate lower levels of theoperating system (e.g., a kernel 642) for processing. Note that whileshell 640 is a text-based, line-oriented user interface, the presentdisclosure will equally well support other user interface modes, such asgraphical, voice, gestural, etc.

As depicted, OS 638 also includes kernel 642, which includes lowerlevels of functionality for OS 638, including providing essentialservices required by other parts of OS 638 and application programs 644,including memory management, process and task management, diskmanagement, and mouse and keyboard management.

Application programs 644 include a renderer, shown in exemplary manneras a browser 646. Browser 646 includes program modules and instructionsenabling a world wide web (WWW) client (i.e., computer 602) to send andreceive network messages to the Internet using hypertext transferprotocol (HTTP) messaging, thus enabling communication with softwaredeploying server 650 and other described computer systems.

Application programs 644 also include a work request prioritizationprogram (WRPP) 648, which, when executed, performs some or all of theprocesses described in FIGS. 1-5 and 7. In one embodiment, WRPP 648 isdownloadable from software deploying server 650 in an on-demand basis,such that units of code are downloaded only when needed. In anotherembodiment, some or all of the processes executed by WRPP 648 areperformed by software deploying server 650 itself, thus minimizing theuse of resources within computer 602.

Software factory managing computer 652 is dedicated to managing asoftware factory (e.g., as depicted in FIG. 1). Similarly, softwarefactory managing computer 652 may be affiliated with one or moreparticular work areas (e.g., a workstation in an assembly line) within asoftware factory. In another embodiment, software factory managementcomputer 652 controls the assignment, execution, and work flow of workrequests and/or work packets through a traditional factory thatmanufactures physical (i.e., non-software) objects/products.

The hardware elements depicted in computer 602 are not intended to beexhaustive, but rather are representative to highlight essentialcomponents required by the present disclosure. For instance, computer602 may include alternate memory storage devices such as magneticcassettes, digital versatile disks (DVDs), Bernoulli cartridges, and thelike. These and other variations are intended to be within the spiritand scope of the present disclosure.

Referring now to FIG. 7, a high level flow chart of one or moreexemplary steps taken by a processor to schedule execution of workrequests through work plan prioritization is presented. After initiatorblock 702, which may be prompted by one or more work requests beingsubmitted to a factory, one or more work packets are mapped to andassigned to each work request from a group of work requests (block 704).For example, as shown above in Table 1, work packets WP1 and WP2 areassigned to work request RO1, work packets WP1 and WP3 are assigned towork request RO2, and work packet WP2 is assigned to work request RO3.As described in block 706, a complexity level is derived for andassigned to each work packet. In the example shown in Table 1, workpacket WP1 is assigned a complexity level of high (H), while the workpacket WP2 is assigned a complexity of low (L), and the work packet WP3is assigned a complexity level of high (H). These complexity levels arederived from an initial estimate for a duration of time, a number ofresources, and resource skill requirements required for completing eachwork packet. For example, if work packet WP1 is predicted to take a longtime to complete using many highly skilled resources (e.g., workers),then it receives a high complexity rating/level (H). Conversely, workpacket WP2 will not take long to execute and/or will require only a fewsemi-skilled workers, thus it receives the low complexity rating/level(L).

As depicted in block 708, a priority level of each work request isdetermined for each entity from a group of entities. Each priority leveldescribes how urgent execution of a specific work request is to aparticular entity from the group of entities. In the example shown inTable 1, the entity labeled “Customer” urgently needs work request RO1to be completed in order to create a finished product. For example, ifthe finished product is a component of a larger project, then the“Customer” may have an urgent need for the finished product in order tocomplete the larger project. Thus, work request RO1 has a “high”priority level from the point of view of “Customer”. However, the“Factory” in which the work request will be executed and the “DeliverOrganization” that will broker/deliver the finished product do notconsider work request RO1 to be a high priority (from theirperspective). For example, if the “Factory” has other work requests(e.g., work request RO3) that has a higher priority, or if failing toproduce the finished product of work request RO1 will not result in anysignificant late penalties, etc., then the “Factory” may give workrequest RO1 a “medium” priority level from its perspective.

With reference now to block 710, a global priority is determined for thegroup of work requests. This global priority provides a preliminaryranking for ordering execution of the group of work requests. The globalpriority is determined for the group of work requests by factoring in aresource availability for executing each work request, a cost ofexecuting each work request, a financial profit derived by each entityfrom the group of entities from executing each work request, and thepriority level of each work request for each entity from the group ofentities. Thus, in the example shown in Table 1, the global priority mayinitially rank the work orders such that they are executed in the orderof work orders RO1, RO3, and then RO2. However, in one embodiment thefinal ranking of work order execution sequencing also depends on thecomplexity levels that have been assigned to the work packets, asdescribed in block 706. Thus, a final priority function, based on theglobal priority for the group of work requests and the complexity levelassigned to each of the multiple work packets, is generated (block 712),and the execution of the work requests is scheduled based on thispriority function (block 716). In the example shown in Table 1, workrequest RO1 is still executed first (as suggested by the global prioritydetermined in block 710). However, work request RO2 moves up to secondplace for execution scheduling, since the work packets (WP1 and WP3)that make up the work packet RO2 are both highly complex, indicatingthat additional time will be needed to complete the execution of workrequest RO2.

In one embodiment, the priority function derived in block 712 can bederived by minimizing y* in the formula

${y^{*} = {\underset{{c_{i}{(y)}} \geq 0}{argmin}{\sum\limits_{l}{{W\left( {y_{l},p_{l},s_{l}} \right)}{U\left( {{C\left( y_{l} \right)} - D_{l}} \right)}}}}},$where W( ) represents the priority function, y_(l) is a decision vectorfor execution of each l^(th) work item, p_(l) is a set of weightedpriorities for the group of entities for each l^(th) work item, s_(i) isa set of skills required for execution of each l^(th) work item, C isthe completion time for execution of each l^(th) work item, and D_(l) isthe deadline of each t^(th) work item.

In one embodiment, the group of entities in Table 1 that are associatedwith a product may include a producer of a product (e.g., a factory), adistributor of the product (e.g., a broker and/or shipper of theproduct), and a customer for the product (e.g., an enduser/purchaser/orderer/etc.). In one embodiment, the product is softwareapplication development and maintenance, such that the producer is asoftware factory that utilizes pooled resources (as described above inthe description of a software factory). In this embodiment, execution ofthe software application development and maintenance in the softwarefactory is prioritized based on the priority function set above.

With reference now to block 714, in one embodiment of the presentdisclosure the ordering (scheduling) of execution of work requests isfurther based on entity priority ratings that describe relativepreeminence rankings to each of the group of entities. For example, acustomer may be given a higher entity priority rating than a factory ordelivery organization. Thus, a customer assigning a “Medium” prioritylevel to a work request (e.g., work request RO3 shown in Table 1) may“trump” the “High” priority level for that work request, thus causingwork request RO3 to be executed before work request RO2 (block 716).Alternatively, these entity priority ratings may be ignored whenscheduling execution of the work requests, such that the priority levelsof each of the work requests are independent of the entity priorityratings.

The process ends at terminator block 718.

The flowchart and block diagrams in the figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementationsof systems, methods and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present disclosure. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portionof code, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be notedthat, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in theblock may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, twoblocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantiallyconcurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverseorder, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be notedthat each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, andcombinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchartillustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-basedsystems that perform the specified functions or acts, or combinations ofspecial purpose hardware and computer instructions.

The terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particularembodiments only and is not intended to be limiting of the invention. Asused herein, the singular forms “a”, “an” and “the” are intended toinclude the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly indicatesotherwise. It will be further understood that the terms “comprises”and/or “comprising,” when used in this specification, specify thepresence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements,and/or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of oneor more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements,components, and/or groups thereof.

The corresponding structures, materials, acts, and equivalents of allmeans or step plus function elements in the claims below are intended toinclude any structure, material, or act for performing the function incombination with other claimed elements as specifically claimed. Thedescription of various embodiments of the present invention has beenpresented for purposes of illustration and description, but is notintended to be exhaustive or limited to the invention in the formdisclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to thoseof ordinary skill in the art without departing from the scope and spiritof the invention. The embodiment was chosen and described in order tobest explain the principles of the invention and the practicalapplication, and to enable others of ordinary skill in the art tounderstand the invention for various embodiments with variousmodifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated.

Note further that any methods described in the present disclosure may beimplemented through the use of a VHDL (VHSIC Hardware DescriptionLanguage) program and a VHDL chip. VHDL is an exemplary design-entrylanguage for Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), ApplicationSpecific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), and other similar electronicdevices. Thus, any software-implemented method described herein may beemulated by a hardware-based VHDL program, which is then applied to aVHDL chip, such as a FPGA.

Having thus described embodiments of the invention of the presentapplication in detail and by reference to illustrative embodimentsthereof, it will be apparent that modifications and variations arepossible without departing from the scope of the invention defined inthe appended claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method for scheduling execution of workrequests through work plan prioritization, the method comprising:mapping and assigning, by one or more processors, at least one workpacket to each work request from a group of work requests; deriving andassigning, by one or more processors, a complexity level to each workpacket from said at least one work packet, wherein the complexity levelis derived from an initial estimate for resource skill requirementsrequired for completing each work packet from said at least one workpacket; determining, by one or more processors, a priority level of eachwork request for each entity from a group of entities, wherein eachpriority level describes how urgent execution of a specific work requestis to a particular entity from the group of entities, wherein the groupof entities comprises a producer of a product, a distributor of theproduct, and a customer for the product, wherein the product is softwareapplication development and maintenance, and wherein the producer is asoftware factory that utilizes pooled resources; determining, by one ormore processors, a global priority for the group of work requests,wherein the global priority provides a preliminary ranking for orderingexecution of the group of work requests, and wherein the global priorityis determined for said group of work requests by factoring in thepriority level of each work request for each entity from the group ofentities; generating, by one or more processors, a priority functionbased on the global priority for the group of work requests and thecomplexity level assigned to each work packet from said at least onework packet, wherein the priority function is derived by minimizing y*in the formula$y^{*} = {\underset{{c_{i}{(y)}} \geq 0}{argmin}{\sum\limits_{l}{{W\left( {y_{l},p_{l},s_{l}} \right)}{U\left( {{C\left( y_{l} \right)} - D_{l}} \right)}}}}$wherein W( ) represents the priority function, y_(l) is a decisionvector for execution of each l^(th) work item, p_(l) is a set ofweighted priorities for the group of entities for each l^(th) work item,s_(l) is a set of skills required for execution of each l^(th) workitem, C is a completion time for execution of each l^(th) work item, andD_(l) is the deadline of each l^(th) work item; prioritizing, by one ormore processors, the software application development and maintenance inthe software factory based on the priority function; and scheduling, byone or more processors, execution of the work requests based on thepriority function.
 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising:assigning, by one or more processors, entity priority ratings to eachentity from the group of entities, wherein the entity priority ratingsdescribe relative preeminence rankings to each entity from the group ofentities.
 3. The method of claim 2, further comprising: furtherscheduling, by one or more processors, execution of the work requestsbased on the entity priority ratings.
 4. The method of claim 2, whereinthe priority levels of each of the work requests are independent of theentity priority ratings.
 5. A computer program product for schedulingexecution of work requests through work plan prioritization, thecomputer program product comprising: a non-transitory computer readablestorage medium; first program instructions to map and assign at leastone work packet to each work request from a group of work requests;second program instructions to derive and assign a complexity level toeach work packet from said at least one work packet, wherein thecomplexity level is derived from an initial estimate for resource skillrequirements required for completing each work packet from said at leastone work packet; third program instructions to determine a prioritylevel of each work request for each entity from a group of entities,wherein each priority level describes how urgent execution of a specificwork request is to a particular entity from the group of entities,wherein the group of entities comprises a producer of a product, adistributor of the product, and a customer for the product, wherein theproduct is software application development and maintenance, and whereinthe producer is a software factory that utilizes pooled resources;fourth program instructions to determine a global priority for the groupof work requests, wherein the global priority provides a preliminaryranking for ordering execution of the group of work requests, andwherein the global priority is determined for said group of workrequests by factoring in the priority level of each work request foreach entity from the group of entities; fifth program instructions togenerate a priority function based on the global priority for the groupof work requests and the complexity level assigned to each work packetfrom said at least one work packet, wherein the priority function isderived by minimizing y* in the formula$y^{*} = {\underset{{c_{i}{(y)}} \geq 0}{argmin}{\sum\limits_{l}{{W\left( {y_{l},p_{l},s_{l}} \right)}{U\left( {{C\left( y_{l} \right)} - D_{l}} \right)}}}}$wherein W( ) represents the priority function, y_(l) is a decisionvector for execution of each l^(th) work item, p_(l) is a set ofweighted priorities for the group of entities for each l^(th) work item,s_(l) is a set of skills required for execution of each l^(th) workitem, C is a completion time for execution of each l^(th) work item, andD_(l) is the deadline of each l^(th) work item; sixth programinstructions to prioritize the software application development andmaintenance in the software factory based on the priority function; andseventh program instructions to schedule execution of the work requestsbased on the priority function; and wherein the first, second, third,fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh program instructions are stored on thenon-transitory computer readable storage medium.
 6. The computer programproduct of claim 5, further comprising: eighth program instructions toassign entity priority ratings to each entity from the group ofentities, wherein the entity priority ratings describe relativepreeminence rankings to each entity from the group of entities, andwherein the eighth program instructions are stored on the non-transitorycomputer readable storage medium.
 7. The computer program product ofclaim 6, further comprising: ninth program instructions to furtherschedule execution of the work requests based on the entity priorityratings, wherein the ninth program instructions are stored on thenon-transitory computer readable storage medium.
 8. The computer programproduct of claim 6, wherein the priority levels of each of the workrequests are independent of the entity priority ratings.
 9. A computersystem comprising: a central processing unit (CPU), a computer readablememory, and a computer readable storage medium; first programinstructions to map and assign at least one work packet to each workrequest from a group of work requests; second program instructions toderive and assign a complexity level to each work packet from said atleast one work packet, wherein the complexity level is derived from aninitial estimate for resource skill requirements required for completingeach work packet from said at least one work packet; third programinstructions to determine a priority level of each work request for eachentity from a group of entities, wherein each priority level describeshow urgent execution of a specific work request is to a particularentity from the group of entities, wherein the group of entitiescomprises a producer of a product, a distributor of the product, and acustomer for the product, wherein the product is software applicationdevelopment and maintenance, and wherein the producer is a softwarefactory that utilizes pooled resources; fourth program instructions todetermine a global priority for the group of work requests, wherein theglobal priority provides a preliminary ranking for ordering execution ofthe group of work requests, and wherein the global priority isdetermined for said group of work requests by factoring in the prioritylevel of each work request for each entity from the group of entities;fifth program instructions to generate a priority function based on theglobal priority for the group of work requests and the complexity levelassigned to each work packet from said at least one work packet, whereinthe priority function is derived by minimizing y* in the formula$y^{*} = {\underset{{c_{i}{(y)}} \geq 0}{argmin}{\sum\limits_{l}{{W\left( {y_{l},p_{l},s_{l}} \right)}{U\left( {{C\left( y_{l} \right)} - D_{l}} \right)}}}}$wherein W( ) represents the priority function, y_(l) is a decisionvector for execution of each l^(th) work item, p_(l) is a set ofweighted priorities for the group of entities for each l^(th) work item,s_(l) is a set of skills required for execution of each l^(th) workitem, C is a completion time for execution of each l^(th) work item, andThis the deadline of each l^(th) work item; sixth program instructionsto prioritize the software application development and maintenance inthe software factory based on the priority function; and seventh programinstructions to schedule execution of the work requests based on thepriority function; and wherein the first, second, third, fourth, fifth,sixth, and seventh program instructions are stored on the computerreadable storage medium for execution by the CPU via the computerreadable memory.
 10. The computer system of claim 9, further comprising:eighth program instructions to assign entity priority ratings to eachentity from the group of entities, wherein the entity priority ratingsdescribe relative preeminence rankings to each entity from the group ofentities, and wherein the eighth program instructions are stored on thecomputer readable storage medium for execution by the CPU via thecomputer readable memory.
 11. The computer system of claim 10, furthercomprising: ninth program instructions to further schedule execution ofthe work requests based on the entity priority ratings, wherein theninth program instructions are stored on the computer readable storagemedium for execution by the CPU via the computer readable memory. 12.The computer system of claim 10, wherein the priority levels of each ofthe work requests are independent of the entity priority ratings.